~ a story of life, love and other things

CANSA – AGM (too many abbreviations?)

The AGM of CANSA (Climate Action Network South Asia) was held on the 31st of July 2011, at Kathmandu with the attendance of organisations working on climate change and its relevant fields.

However the question that popped up in my head was, where the representatives of Maldives were…was it that they were not interested in attending the AGM or was there no organisation that is a member of the network. However that having being left open for deliberation, I shall move on to jot down the secondary thoughts of my pondering and analysis of the relevant event.

So there I was at my first huge gathering of CANSA. Though I had met its members while in attendance at different COP events, it was a first to see the rest of the members, who I assumed were possibly working on grassroot projects (I have no clue why every time I type grassroot, Microsoft word indicates spelling error, yes I get easily distracted…and I am multi tasking while climate finance is overheard with ears, while sounds in my head are being jotted down through the transmission of fingers to the keys of the laptop.) yeah, so where was I? Yes, so I was in this gathering of over 50 representatives from countries of South Asia.

My thoughts on the process? I am not quite sure how I feel about everything in the process of administration and the management. I have realised that there is a secretariat, a national steering committee and a board that moves CANSA forward.

Do I have issues with the system? I am not thinking I do, I prefer to keep things simple while working global. How does this work for me? Well working with the Sri Lankan clan while reaching out to the others from outside. They seem quite “user friendly” and with green lights on. So yea, I am happy with that process as I firmly believe that everyone has the objective of moving forward for progress. I am glad that there is open discussion and that people are willing to link up with the basis of making something good happen.

For me the highlight of the day was the program agenda put forward for the year inclusive of research work being highlighted, and the advocacy programs for which CANSA has already had confirmed funding. Selection of criteria for partnerships for these projects…well something that seemed quite an interesting task to deliberate on. Initially the list had in it, the financial contribution of organisations to projects. This actually got me thinking, does this mean that if you contribute with money, then is that ensuring that you are part of a project? If so, does that not insinuate a certain amount of control provided to those organisations that are already established and have the ability to contribute with money? And also, what is the role of those organisations, who are with not much money and needs capacity building?

To answer this questions a division on working groups was provided and then the outcome seemed thus: There is need to focus on relevance of projects, and an inclusion of two countries in minimum highlighted. However the selection of organisation was suggested to be provided to the national steering committees who were best deemed capable to judge on the capacity of organisations and their deliverance.

Are we agreed upon this? Would this lead to a productive venture? The answers to these remain to be a little vague, as things lie…well at least for me, that is. But I shalt continue to observe, as one says “it is all a learning process” and I am definitely in the process of learning.